Is digital sovereignty in social networks important?

[astro@c3d2.social]

@evan "Yes" without a "but" this time!

[tursiops@tooting.ch]

@evan as the admin of tooting.ch and president of FairSocialNet non profit I very much agree with the fact the social network sovereignty is not only important but crucial.

[evan@cosocial.ca]

@tursiops

[tassoman@orwell.fun]

@evan@cosocial.ca yes, but software should be developed by own country developers

[hamishcampbell@mastodon.social]

@Epic_Null @witchescauldron @evan

Yes, the #openweb in inherently social as its sites linking to sites, so, the term is an overlay from the #dotcons - its very much not clear what value this term brings when we try and scale horizontally rather than vertically. So in this sense its more compost to shovel. But for meany people here vertical scaling dose matter so for them, it's useful?!

We currently do not attempt to bridge this divide.

[epic_null@infosec.exchange]

@hamishcampbell @witchescauldron @evan It's a good point, it I have this vauge feeling like a key piece of information is still missing from the conversation around social media, and around the adoption of the term itself ...

[badrihippo@fosstodon.org]

@evan yes, but we shouldn't stop at the level of (or ideally skip even trying to fit) the level of "countries" and instead let there be sovereignty all the down to smaller organisations and individual humans

[mark_harbinger@mastodon.social]

@evan

'Just asking questions', I see...

[faraiwe@mstdn.social]

@evan who the hell are the 4% saying "no" or "no, but" ???? Are those bridgy interlopers in the fediverse, or what??

[mikelbyl@mstdn.ca]

@faraiwe @evan I can answer that - it's because it's a meaningless or at best confusing term that shares almost no characteristics of *actual* sovereignty. We should resist such platitudes and come up with unique concepts for the context or environment. At worst it's a self-congratulatory buzzword designed to make people feel important.